Witcher 2 was lazy do you agree?

[Typo115]

Witcher 2 was lazy do you agree?

Now listen before anyone starts saying anything READ the whole thing Then voice your opinion.
The reason I think TW2 was a little lazy was the following: Why were there so few side quests in TW2 in TW there were tons of side quests that really got you involved in the story for instances in chapter 1 you had to go through the rain and lite all these candles (which I thought was stupid at 1st but then changed my mine) and in the last chapter getting the sea people and the humans to get along, also Alvin there were sevral sortof menial quests with him like giving him the dimeretium necklace, lastly just going to the inn and drinking w/ buddies like in Chapter 1 if you give Shani the kid then are deciding what to do.
Next on my list is lack of reflection on your actions in TW1 after my 50+ play-through of TW1 in TW2 I only herd once my reflection about saving Adda I mean they could of least had her show up at the peace summit at Loc muuime for this issue i can only compare it to the ME style of reflection which was the best, 2nd to none.
Finally the lack of surprises if you will such as in TW1 when you find out that the preist and all the other people he sent you to to help were all in league w/ Salmandra.
My list can go on for hours does anyone out there agree w/ me even a little Please by all means state your opinion.

 

[Typo115]

NOTE: I consider myself a hard core Witcher fan and will respect any decisions that CDprojekt makes in the future but these improvements I believe would be nice if included in the near future of the series. In other words I'm loyal to the franchise and will get used to anything they do/change as long as they keep what made this game the best in it's class.

 

[thewitcher159]

TW2EE did add some more quests, though I have to agree, more side quests would have been nice. I always like to find out some more about an area that I'm in like its history and its citizens/people. I was kinda disappointed that you couldn't interact as much with some NPCs like the non-humans in Flotsam(would have liked to know more about the history of their suffering, about how Flotsam came to be, etc.). The locations were so beautiful, like Loc Muinne and the Blue Mountains, but didn't really feel like there was much reason to explore aside from finding an awesome/better weapon or a note in a cave/forest etc.

That said, I appreciate the quests and cutscenes they added in the EE, it really did help to make the game more fleshed-out and provide more backstory.

 

[gibb_geralt]

No, i don't agree

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

A game that has two different endgames in Act 1, two almost entirely different Act 2s with different quests and characters, and two substantially different Act 3s, is lazy?

Erh no.

 

[goopit]

Now listen before anyone starts saying anything READ the whole thing Then voice your opinion.

I disagree but I agree that they made certain decisions that made it a shorter game. I thought there were going to be 5 Acts turns out there were just 3 (4.3 if you count the alternate chapters). I think they wanted to add more but just didn't have time.

The witcher 1 quest seemed longer because they were fetch quests straight from MMO's which were actually fine for me personally they were just there to get you extra dosh. It just took a long time to finish the main quest because you had to go around a lot of times and I think they should go back to that format. I spent 7 in game days in Chapter 2 just completing the main quest and sidequests. I had a schedule everyday I'd complete a certain number of sidequest and a part of the main quest then sleep or not depending on the sidequest. I think they should go back to that formula where you don't have to save the world all the time and you're just investigating.

Also C&C was too crystal clear compare to W1.

Remember this moment among others? It was so awesome and it showed me how organic Choice & Consequence can be also the elven supplies in chapter 1. There should be more of these in TW3.

So are they lazy? I say fuck no! We got a bunch of content with a huge difference in graphics and an entirely different chapter. We had more content in terms of assets than the previous witcher it's just the storys quick pace that made it seem like a shorter/lazier game.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Also C&C was too crystal clear compare to W1.

Giving Iorveth his sword or not, didn't have obvious foreseeable consequences in addition to it being a spur of the moment decision where you can't take time to think it through. That was a good moment, with the consequenes done much better than the example you use from TW1.

EDIT: also the choice regarding Aryan La Valette, which not only has political consequences, but also changes bits of the escape from prison in the prologue.

 

[gab961111.59]

I think the development time of the witcher 1 was much more longer. In the wticher 2, they had to rework on the new engine and had many difficulties.

 

[Typo115]

Some are taking it too far, hence I digress. I see all of your points though but I succeeded in finding out more peoples opinion which I owe to all of you so thanks for taking the time to help figure this out but no one mentioned the lack of reflection which was my biggest complaint but don't think I dont like the series because I do probably the best RPG since 2008.

 

[Garrison72]

There's little reflection because TW2's theme is about political intrigue, not self discovery. The thematic shift from TW1 to TW2 is incredibly confident when compared to the haphazard debacle of something like the Mass Effect series. CDPR knows what they're doing in this regard. There isn't any laziness in either game really. I would say TW1 is well padded with some fairly repetitive side quests, but it's real fault lay in a lack of efficiency implementing main quests to further the story. This involves a TON of back tracking, something that TW2 is better without.

 

[Typo115]

There's little reflection because TW2's theme is about political intrigue, not self discovery. The thematic shift from TW1 to TW2 is incredibly confident when compared to the haphazard debacle of something like the Mass Effect series. CDPR knows what they're doing in this regard. There isn't any laziness in either game really. I would say TW1 is well padded with some fairly repetitive side quests, but it's real fault lay in a lack of efficiency implementing main quests to further the story. This involves a TON of back tracking, something that TW2 is better without.

True, I do like TW2 a lot better but there is always room for improvement.

 

[Sirnaq]

No, most witcher 1 quests are mmo tier monster contracts or backtracking quests involving walking, walking and more walking,add terrible autosave system and voila hours of your time wasted. Im grateful to cdpr that they get rid of or changed these quests. Most side-quests in tw2 have some kind of story and reason. Moreover side-quests in tw2 are not as tedious as in witcher 1. There is drinking quest in tw2 in chapter 1. TW2 has completely different story in complete different places, why should Adda be in loc muinne? As it goes for surprises, we have choices that can change whole chapters, i wouldn't call that lazy. TW2 has greater quality than TW1, which has still a lot of problems. Just look at attention to detail in tw2 they engineered whole new engine from scratch for this game, look at all these endings at the end. Combat in tw2 is actually fun and playable unlike in tw1. Also consider that npcs are better written in tw2. Only things that i can accused cdpr of is that they get rid of slavic feel in tw2 and large bestiary. Also all these loading screens in tw1 driving me crazy not to mention crashes here and there on high end machine.

 

[goopit]

Giving Iorveth his sword or not, didn't have obvious foreseeable consequences in addition to it being a spur of the moment decision where you can't take time to think it through. That was a good moment, with the consequenes done much better than the example you use from TW1.

EDIT: also the choice regarding Aryan La Valette, which not only has political consequences, but also changes bits of the escape from prison in the prologue.

I wouldn't say it's better. Giving Iorveth his sword, I think was an emotional choice and yeah it was unforeseeable. I think the W1 choice was better because

A: It didn't feel like a choice it just felt like it wouldn't really affect you down the line

B: The consequence happened much later in the story rather than just after the fight with Letho so you'd have a better deterrent of just loading the save to get the better outcome.

I didn't really find a reason to not talk Aryan out of it. He wasn't that bad a guy and Geralt shouldn't really do Foltests dirty work for him. I did like both decisions though, like I said we got more content out of it than W1 but I still miss W1 choice for the above reasons.

no one mentioned the lack of reflection which was my biggest complaint

Yeah I miss that identity quest. I missed telling Triss what I thought about the Scoiatel and the Order. There was something like this though when you told Dandelion your motivations about Letho if you want to kill him or not.

 

[soldiergeralt]

please use a more judgmental term to describe the game next time, i'm sure the fans appreciate it.

 

[wichat]

Lazy a game that makes me play it once again and again and makes me believe I'm playing a different free and coherent DLC each time?
Well, it 's a point of view which I do not share

 

[Thoric]

It's a different type of story. The world in the first Witcher was pretty much unfazed of what had happened at Kaer Morhen, and Geralt was going around, opening doors through his services and snooping for leads to a conspiracy that only manifests at the very end.

In TW2, Temeria is immediately plunged into chaos, Geralt is framed with the murder of a monarch and forced into an uneasy alliance, and then a certain someone gets kidnapped. Sure he still gets the occasional contract, but he's too far embroiled in the situation to let up and go hunt drowners for days.

It's kinda like the shift from the short stories to the saga. Less solo monster hunting, more politics, camaraderie and multiple POVs.

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

I wouldn't exactly call it lazy - but the high amount of parallel story lines (Two seperate second acts) shows in the length of individual playthroughs, where TW1 is indeed superior.

 

[reconmember]

Hah lol no.

Not lazy, but I can agree that it didn't have that "detail" that TW1 had.

 

[FoggyFishburne]

A game that has two different endgames in Act 1, two almost entirely different Act 2s with different quests and characters, and two substantially different Act 3s, is lazy?

Erh no.

Damn ninja! Yeah what this guy says. Damn, I was about to say just this. So annoying!

Funny story. Some of the quests in Witcher 1 were just meh. Very MMO in their nature. On top of that, it was kinda frustrating that I had to alt+tab down every two minutes to check up on some quest and make sure I did everything right. Despite that, I still missed some content or did some quest in the wrong order which meant I couldn't complete some other quests. It was ridiculous. And I remember saying to myself: "Damn, I'd rather have quality content than this quantity maze mystery bullshit on a side order with some dip MMO content quests." And I got my wish in Witcher 2.

Don't get me wrong. I fucking love Witcher. But Witcher 2 is just more fun and the narrative flows much better. Better quests. Better structure. And, the best part of the quests in Witcher 2, some quests are completely different depending on the choices you made. Amazing game. So no. Witcher 2, lazy? Nah man. Quite the contrary. Mass Effect 3, now THAT is what I call lazy.

 

[username_2648340]

Nope. I disagree. Witcher 2 has better combat, better more involving sidequests, better EVERYTHING. I can replay this game over and over again. I enjoyed the first game, but I can't replay it over and over because the first game is just too tedious, too much backtracking (swamps anyone), too many fetch me this and that quests, boring weapons, annoying combat system, boring armor and boring abilities.

Look, the first game was great, for its time and I enjoyed it for what it was, but that was 2007. CDPR learned a lot from it and it shows in the second game. Witcher 2 is a much better game.